Offending Girls and Restorative Justice: A Critical Analysis
| Author | Jodie Hodgson |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1473225420967751 |
| Published date | 01 August 2022 |
| Date | 01 August 2022 |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225420967751
Youth Justice
2022, Vol. 22(2) 166 –188
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1473225420967751
journals.sagepub.com/home/yjj
Offending Girls and Restorative
Justice: A Critical Analysis
Jodie Hodgson
Abstract
The contemporary popularity of restorative justice, within youth justice, has expanded significantly in recent
decades. Despite this, there is a considerable lack of research which explores girls’ experiences of restorative
justice interventions. Drawing on the experiences of young female offenders, who have participated in
restorative justice conferencing, this article presents research findings generated from interviews undertaken
with 15 girls and 13 youth justice practitioners, in order to critically analyse their views and experiences
through a gendered lens. The analysis and discussion presented provides a critical insight into the ways in
which girls’ experience, internalise and engage in restorative justice conferencing and how these experiences
fundamentally conflict with practitioners’ views on conferencing with girls in the youth justice system.
Keywords
conferencing, girls, restorative justice, youth justice
Introduction
Despite restorative justice (RJ) being firmly embedded within youth justice policy and
practice, on an international scale (Lynch, 2010), girls’ experiences of participating in
restorative interventions have been largely neglected. The literature, which does discuss
issues of gender and RJ, tends to ‘address the ways in which it may help or hinder female
victims . . . [and] few have ventured to consider how it may help or hinder female offend-
ers’ (Daly, 2008: 113). This gender gap is further amplified when considering the experi-
ences of offending girls. This article provides a critical exploration of offending girls’
experiences of participating in a RJ conference.
Drawing upon empirical data collected from interviews with 15 girls who have partici-
pated in a RJ conference and 13 RJ practitioners working in the Youth Justice Service, the
article provides a unique insight into RJ practices used with girls in the justice system.
Through the juxtaposition of girls’ subjective experiences of participating in a RJ confer-
ence and practitioners’ perspectives of their experiences the data and analysis presented
Corresponding author:
Jodie Hodgson, Leeds Beckett University, Calverley Building, Portland Way, Leeds LS1 3HE, UK.
Email: Jodie.Hodgson@leedsbeckett.ac.uk
967751YJJ0010.1177/1473225420967751Youth JusticeHodgson
research-article2020
Original Article
Hodgson 167
reveals conflicting and divergent viewpoints concerning RJ practices used in the Youth
Justice Service. Focusing specifically on the operations, dynamics and outcomes of RJ
conferencing with young female offenders, the article draws attention to the ways in
which the girls’ viewed their participation in the conference as a negative experience,
while practitioners viewed RJ as an overwhelmingly positive intervention, particularly
suitable for girls involved in the justice system.
The findings which illustrate this dichotomy are discussed in relation to three themes:
RJ rhetoric versus reality, perspectives on emotions and outcomes and issues of power and
control. Fundamentally, the article conceptualises this dichotomy between practitioners’
perspectives and girls’ narratives as a strategy of resistance, on behalf of the girls, to RJ
interventions which fail to acknowledge or respond to the complex realities of girls’ lives
and the way in which they are shaped by experiences of social injustice, oppression and
inequality. Their resistance can be seen as a strategy to reformulate their own subjectivi-
ties, and make sense of, and navigate, their experience through the demonstration of
agency, which rejects the narrow confines of the victim and offender status prescribed
within RJ discourse.
The Origins and Development of Restorative Justice
In recent decades, RJ has gained significant popularity and momentum within criminal
justice and political and academic discourse nationally and internationally (Boyes-Watson,
2018). Proponents consider it to be an alternative paradigm for delivering justice, con-
cerned with repairing harm in the aftermath of an offence as opposed to the infliction of
punishment. At the centre of RJ philosophy is the desire for an inclusive, participatory
approach to conflict resolution, which emphasises the importance of restoring relation-
ships between victims, offenders and their communities (Zehr, 1990).
Philosophically situated as an alternative method of crime control, RJ has come to be
closely associated with reintegrative shaming theory (RIST) developed by Braithwaite
(1989). The central premise of RIST is
. . . that locations in space and time where shame is communicated effectively and reintegratively
will be times and places where there is less predatory crime . . . (Braithwaite and Braithwaite,
2001: 39)
The theoretical arguments contained within RIST are considered to be an important
influence with respect to the growth of RJ in Western society and have had a significant
practical impact on the development of restorative practice, particularly restorative con-
ferencing (Retzinger and Scheff, 1996; Young and Goold, 1999). RJ conferencing is a
process whereby ‘victims and offenders involved in a crime meet in the presence of a
trained facilitator with their families and friends or others affected by the crime, to discuss
and resolve the offence and its consequences’ (Strang et al., 2013: 3). It is the model of RJ
conferencing which appears to have had the most influential impact with regard to the
application of Braithwaite’s (1989) RIST and the proliferation of restorative practice out-
side of Australia and New Zealand (Johnstone, 2011).
To continue reading
Request your trial